Evaluation of a hybrid peer-teaching method for undergraduate medical microbiology
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Background Microbiology in undergraduate medical education has been traditionally taught through didactic lectures. However, alternative educational strategies such as case-based learning and peer-teaching can be effective teaching methods for medical students. Objectives To evaluate the effectiveness of a newly implemented teaching strategy which integrates both peer-teaching and case-based learning into a second year microbiology course for medical students. Methods The majority of the microbiology course was taught by students under the supervision of an instructor. Students were broken up into groups of 16 and each group member had to teach a specific objective belonging to a microbiology case. Questionnaires were administered before and after the microbiology course (N=42; 71% participation) to assess whether change occurred in students perceptions and opinions of the new teaching format. Course ratings from the Memorial University Medical School Course Evaluation form were analyzed to compare the course ratings of microbiology when it was taught by lectures in 2010/2011 compared to the new hybrid format in 2011/2012. Results Students did not agree that they learn best when taught by a peer (1.49/5) or that the new teaching methods would help them gain a better understanding (1.61/5) and improve their learning (1.51/5) of the course material compared to lectures. These ratings significantly increased by the end of the course (P<0.05), but still remained low. Student comments indicated that they enjoyed the peer interaction involved in the peer-teaching sessions however, the large number of students per group prevented enough time for group discussion. Students were also skeptical that the information being presented by their peers was accurate, decreasing their satisfaction with the peer presentations. The overall course rating of microbiology in 2010/2011 (4.3/5) when taught by lectures was significantly higher than the course rating in 2011/2012 (3.5/5) when taught with the new hybrid format (P<0.05). Conclusions Overall, students were not satisfied with the new hybrid teaching format for microbiology. However, having a smaller number of students per group, allowing more time or group discussion and providing clear expectations and guidelines to students before they teach may increase overall satisfaction with this teaching method.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction machine sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.
Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,008 | 0,016 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Science ouverte | 0,002 | 0,001 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,002 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».